With respect, it seems clear that Trijang Choktrul Rinpoche has already given his opinion regarding the real Domo Geshe Rinpoche's Yangsi......as has HHDL. What do you make of this, taken from http://www.infinitenetworks.com/node/189:

1. The Gelug Tradition to which Ms.Quinn-Dadak purports to belong as Domo Geshe Rinpoche does not allow and does not recognize self-proclaimed reincarnations like her own. According to the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism, all reincarnations must be officially recognized by other incarnate lamas. This has not been her case.Consequently, neither her assumed identity nor any of her acts performed as Domo Geshe Rimpoche in this country or abroad, including the ordination of monks and nuns, can be regarded as having any legitimacy. 2. The monasteries and followers of Kyabje Domo Geshe Rinpoche in India and in Tibet, as well as his followers in the United States and all around the world, have unanimously requested H.H. Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche, the reincarnation of Kyabje Domo Geshe Rinpoche's root guru, to be solely responsible for the formal recognition of the next incarnation of our revered guru. H.H. Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche has informed us that the incarnation has already been born and is now a small child. This means that in due course that child will officially be recognized as Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 3. Therefore, H.H.Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche, his followers, and all the followers of the late Kyabje Domo Geshe Rinpoche, categorically reject any claim by anyone else, whether man or woman, American or Tibetan, to be the true incarnation. In May, 2003, a lawyer retained by the Dungkar Gonpa Society wrote to Ms. Quinn-Dadak to instruct her to cease representing herself as Domo Geshe Rinpoche. We have waited for more than a year for her to comply, but to no avail. We now demand for the reasons stated above that: 1. Ms. Quinn-Dadak must cease using the name of Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 2. Ms. Quinn-Dadak must cease her claims to be the incarnation of Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 3. The White Conch Dharma Center must remove from its website all statements purporting Ms. Quinn-Dadak to be the incarnation of Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 4. The phrase "female incarnation of Domo Geshe," which the White Conch Dharma Center added to the lineage prayer Wonderful Golden Rosary, must be deleted and the prayer itself must be removed from the White Conch Dharma Center website. If within twenty-one days from the date of this letter these demands are not met, we will make copies of this letter publicly and widely available. Whatever Ms. Quinn-Dadak does or teaches under her own name is not our concern. However, she may not use the name "Domo Geshe Rinpoche" nor may she continue to pretend to be his true incarnation.

I suppose you could say that the statements of TCR and HHDL, that they have already identified the Yangsi, don't EXPLICITLY state that Ms. Quinn is a fraud.......

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

I understand that there's correct protocol within the Gelug hierarchy.

What I find interesting is that the statement seems to suggestthat the Gelug tradition does not accept the possibility of multipletulkus of a teaching line such as the three Dudjoms or the twoDodrupchens.

I don't believe Gelugpas actually deny this possibility, i simplyget that impression from this statement. My observationis not connected with any view at all in regard to thealleged incarnation at hand.

With respect, it seems clear that Trijang Choktrul Rinpoche has already given his opinion regarding the real Domo Geshe Rinpoche's Yangsi......as has HHDL. What do you make of this, taken from http://www.infinitenetworks.com/node/189:

1. The Gelug Tradition to which Ms.Quinn-Dadak purports to belong as Domo Geshe Rinpoche does not allow and does not recognize self-proclaimed reincarnations like her own. According to the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism, all reincarnations must be officially recognized by other incarnate lamas. This has not been her case.Consequently, neither her assumed identity nor any of her acts performed as Domo Geshe Rimpoche in this country or abroad, including the ordination of monks and nuns, can be regarded as having any legitimacy. 2. The monasteries and followers of Kyabje Domo Geshe Rinpoche in India and in Tibet, as well as his followers in the United States and all around the world, have unanimously requested H.H. Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche, the reincarnation of Kyabje Domo Geshe Rinpoche's root guru, to be solely responsible for the formal recognition of the next incarnation of our revered guru. H.H. Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche has informed us that the incarnation has already been born and is now a small child. This means that in due course that child will officially be recognized as Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 3. Therefore, H.H.Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche, his followers, and all the followers of the late Kyabje Domo Geshe Rinpoche, categorically reject any claim by anyone else, whether man or woman, American or Tibetan, to be the true incarnation. In May, 2003, a lawyer retained by the Dungkar Gonpa Society wrote to Ms. Quinn-Dadak to instruct her to cease representing herself as Domo Geshe Rinpoche. We have waited for more than a year for her to comply, but to no avail. We now demand for the reasons stated above that: 1. Ms. Quinn-Dadak must cease using the name of Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 2. Ms. Quinn-Dadak must cease her claims to be the incarnation of Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 3. The White Conch Dharma Center must remove from its website all statements purporting Ms. Quinn-Dadak to be the incarnation of Domo Geshe Rinpoche. 4. The phrase "female incarnation of Domo Geshe," which the White Conch Dharma Center added to the lineage prayer Wonderful Golden Rosary, must be deleted and the prayer itself must be removed from the White Conch Dharma Center website. If within twenty-one days from the date of this letter these demands are not met, we will make copies of this letter publicly and widely available. Whatever Ms. Quinn-Dadak does or teaches under her own name is not our concern. However, she may not use the name "Domo Geshe Rinpoche" nor may she continue to pretend to be his true incarnation.

I suppose you could say that the statements of TCR and HHDL, that they have already identified the Yangsi, don't EXPLICITLY state that Ms. Quinn is a fraud.......

My friend its pretty explicitly know that she is a fraud amongst everyone. His Holiness Trijang Chocktrul has already Identified the Reincarnate Domo Rinpoche.Whats more scary is she is ordaining people, so some obviously think she is Domo Geshe.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

Ven. Lozang Gyaltsan wrote:I would like to weigh-in on this topic and perhaps shed some light on it. With respect to whether or not she is 'drong-jug' emanation of the previous Domo Geshe: I do not, unequivocably, know the answer to this question and neither do any of you! None of us is even remotely qualified to make such a statement. Drong-jug emanations are rare but not unheard of; the present H.E. Jetsun Dhampa Hogtugtu is such. Anyone suggesting that the previous Domo Geshe was incapable of emanating more than one rebirth knows nothing of this enlightened being and even less of the tulku system. Both Trijang Dorje Chang and HHDL have each recognized a different 'official' incarnation. Tell me, please, which of these recognitions is the fraud? I have yet to hear that either of them has made a public statement labeling her a fraud. In order to claim that she is a fraud one would have to know what is in her heart and anyone claiming to know that would not be speaking truthfully but repeating the words of another, who also does not really know. We should be more suspicious of someone who claims to know what is in the heart of another than of her claim. I'm not suggesting that the claim go unexamined just that no one qualified has yet examined it. And until this is done any proclamation that she is a fraud is pretentious, at best, and most certainly of suspect motive. With respect to the projects she is trying to fund: I have know her for many years, long before this controversy arose. In all those years I have never found any deception in her. I am not, in the traditional Vajrayana understanding, one of her 'students'. I have taken teachings from her and been in retreat. I can state, uneqivocably, that the projects her groups funds are real and that the funds donated to her group go to these projects.I suggest you decide for yourself by listening to her teachings, whether or not she is a Lama you should follow. Further, you should wait until either Trijang Dorje Chang or HHDL [depending on your affiliation] make some official statement before proclaiming her to be a fraud. If you are a Vajrayana practitioner, I can provide you with a copy of both Boddhisattva and Tantric Root Vows you took since you have obviously failed to read them often enough or, failiong that, you have obviously chosen to ignore them. If you are not following the Vajrayana path, none of this is any of your concern. Find something that is. at least, constructive to do with your time, because you are wasting ours...

At the risk of wasting more of your time, Venerable, do you care to enlighten us on the rebuttals to your claim posted above by conebeckham? At least to reassure those who have chosen to support your work (Norbu House specifically) financially and emotionally?

Since some seem to want to split linguistic hairs, let's do so. Using the logic proposed, might one assume [sorry, imply] from the endorsement of Trijang Dorje Chang that he is saying that the choice of HHDL is a fraud? Is HHDL 'implying" the same of Trijang Rinpoche's choice? Since neither have called the other choice a 'fraud", for someone to 'imply' such from the lack of it having been said is pretty weak reasoning, something one encounters a lot when someone with little knowledge of a topic and a mind inexperienced at discourse sits at a keyboard. At the risk of repeating myself, drong jug emanations are not unknown in the Vajrayana tradition. Anyone who thinks the previous Domo Geshe Rinpoche incapable of such a feat knows nothing of this highly realized being and even less of the Tulku system. I'm not suggesting that this is what occurred. I am not saying that the claims of the DGR in Wisconsin are valid. Once again, such decisions are above my pay-grade and, unless your name.. your title is Trijang Dorje Chang or HHDL 14, it is above your pay grade as well. So, continue pontificating... just do so with the knowledge that you are expressing an opinion, probably an unqualified one based not on reason or even linguistic sensibility. Apparently, a dislike of someone else is all that is necessary to make one an expert on fraudulent behavior and access to a computer is all that is necessary to engage in slanderous speech, which is, if you're not the authoritative voice on matters like this, exactly what you are doing.Once again, if you are not a Vajrayana practitioner, none of this really concerns you beyond whatever prurient interest you may have in it or whatever the grudge you have against this woman. If you are a Vajrayana practitioner, I offer the following for your consideration:When you took Vajrayana empowerment, among the many pledges and commitments you made were Fourteen root vows, the transgression of which constitutes a tantric downfall: The downfalls are: 1. Disrespecting the Lama. 2. Disregarding the precepts. 3. Criticizing Vajra brothers & sisters. 4. Giving up love for sentient beings. 5. Giving up wishing bodhichitta and active bodhichitta. 6. Criticizing any Dharma of the Sutra and Tantra teachings. 7. Declaring secret teachings to those who are spiritually unripe. 8. Demeaning your heaps [abusing your own aggregates]. 9. Rejecting Emptiness. 10. Befriending harmful persons. 11. Not recalling Right View. 12. Destroying another's faith. 13. Not keeping the pledges. 14, Criticizing women.Recognize yourself anywhere in there? I do, all the time. If you are Vajrayana, you have more important things to do than worry about the claims of someone else to be a tulku. Just trying to apply # 13 every day should keep most all of us very busy. Toss-in #14 and most people wouId have to just keep their mouths shut all the time. It is almost pitiful that any one Vajrayana person should find it necessary to remind others of not just the seriousness of the tantric commitments, but of the commitments themselves. As to dealing with non-Vajrayana interest in Vajrayana matters, I offer the following from Dean Koontz, the American novelist: "One of the greatest sorrows of human existence is that some people are not happy merely to be alive but find their happiness only in the misery of others".

Just to clarify: I have no direct connection to the Norbu House project or other projects of White Conch Dharma. I do support the group and their work. I know many White Conch members. They are hard-working, dedicated individuals both in their Dharma practice and in their commitment to other sentient beings. Whatever opinion you may have of the controversy surrounding the Lama, you have no reason to be disrespectful of her, her students, or the projects they undertake.

Ven. Lozang Gyaltsan wrote: If you are a Vajrayana practitioner, I offer the following for your consideration:When you took Vajrayana empowerment, among the many pledges and commitments you made were Fourteen root vows, the transgression of which constitutes a tantric downfall: The downfalls are: 1. Disrespecting the Lama. 2. Disregarding the precepts. 3. Criticizing Vajra brothers & sisters. 4. Giving up love for sentient beings. 5. Giving up wishing bodhichitta and active bodhichitta. 6. Criticizing any Dharma of the Sutra and Tantra teachings. 7. Declaring secret teachings to those who are spiritually unripe. 8. Demeaning your heaps [abusing your own aggregates]. 9. Rejecting Emptiness. 10. Befriending harmful persons. 11. Not recalling Right View. 12. Destroying another's faith. 13. Not keeping the pledges. 14, Criticizing women.

People know what the vows are, they dont need you to post them along with your assumption that they have been violated in this thread. They have not. If you want to play that game it goes both ways. It could easily be stated that you are dangerously close to violating number 10 by defending an obvious charlatan. Just out of curiosity, who ordained you venerable?

Ven. Lozang Gyaltsan wrote: 14, Criticizing women.... Toss-in #14 and most people wouId have to just keep their mouths shut all the time.

This pledge does not mean that if a person is a woman and does something sketchy or wrong that their actions or behavior cannot be critizied. It means at a minimum to not disparage women due to their gender or due to societal denegration of women. For example, if a woman is abusive then she can be criticized on this point. If a woman makes an incorrect decision in a business evnironment then she can be criticized on this point.

In this case the woman is question may or may not be doing good things (you have indicated that she is not diverting finances and her activities on this point may be gnerous and beneficial). But ordaining people? Claiming this unusual form of tulkuhood when Trijang Choktrul Rinpoche has asked her to not continue with this claim? If people have concerns about teachers then these should be brought up and addressed. There are some active false teachers. And some of them may also have good intentions and even be somewhat beneficial in worldly terms .....

BTW - for my own edification, which of the main 14 vows do you claim are being violated by discussing this topic?

The woman is a fraud, cheating gullible and ill informed people, has been warned, and this fellow has the nerve to come here defending her, using the vows as a bogey to hinder the exposure of a charlatan. If we have the least sense of compassion, we should call a spade a spade when we see someone pretending to be a Vajrayana teacher. A while ago I think Namdrol wrote something like if a teacher is not qualified, he is stealing precious human lives. That's the case here.

The evidence presented seems to point (quite clearly) to the fact that her claim to being a tulku has been discredited by both of the "competing" sides vying for recognition. So you might ask: "Why take the side of the other two competitors?" It would be a good question. My answer would be that at least they are following correct procedure.

As a Vajrayana practitioner you would know that a student must investigate a teacher before commiting to them. This thread is an investigation of the veracity of her claim to being an official teacher (I mean she is ordaining people for crying out loud! Most of the qualified lama I know would not even do this!) and thus I cannot see how it contravenes samaya. Really, we do not even know if she is a Vajrayana practitioner so... PS Actually Venerable, by supporting her you might even be in contravention of this samaya: 10. Befriending harmful persons.

Ven. Lozang Gyaltsan wrote:Just to clarify: I have no direct connection to the Norbu House project or other projects of White Conch Dharma. I do support the group and their work. I know many White Conch members. They are hard-working, dedicated individuals both in their Dharma practice and in their commitment to other sentient beings. Whatever opinion you may have of the controversy surrounding the Lama, you have no reason to be disrespectful of her, her students, or the projects they undertake.

Mr Lozang, or who ever you really are, I was a very close student of this woman and I know from experience, she does not practice what she teaches. Yes, she does "ordain" if you will without a quorum of fully ordained monks. She also openly rejects certain vinaya vows as they are not convenient for her. "ordained" monk have been seen swimming half naked with scantly clad women in Bali for example. Her behavior has often encouraged student to compete with each other for her attention and fight with one another.

She also has created her own meditation practices. Ist, it the was the "Blue-Light Meditation" supposedly based on Heruka tantra and now that has morphed to the Green-Light meditation. She would just start students out on a tantic meditation, many of whom never studied a word of Buddhism prior to meeting her.

She also on many occasions proclaimed herself to be 1) the Guru of Gurus (other gurus come to her for teaching), 2) Reincarnation of Milarepa 3) the reincarnation of Shariputra, and 4) the reincarnation of one of Je TsongKhapa's 2 main disciples. She made these proclamations over the course of time and I found it unbelievable that some of her students would just accept it verbatim. When I challenged them if they really believe it, they responded in the affirmative and didn't think it was impossible at all.

While I was there I watched several peoples dysfunctions become worse, not better which I felt was telling. I believe the student is a reflection of the teacher and while it may or may have not changed since I left, the students were out of hand in their behaviors in the way they treated each other. I found more love and acceptance in a local Baptist church than in our group. it was just another of a long list of red flags for me at the time.

I feel that pointing out that she has not been recognized by either HHDL and Trijang Rinpoche say a lot. I was with her on her first trip to India and HHDL refused to see her and yet she still claimed that HHDL had given her "inner" recognition which was more important according to her at the time. She was embarrassed at Sera Je when no teacher would come and acknowledge her at all. There are reasons for this.

Of the hundred and hundreds of people who became her student, only a bare handful of those people remain from 2001. She has lost appeal to many people, some who were significant donors, just by how she is and behaves. While all groups have some attrition, it seems to be excessive from her group.

It also is important to follow the guidelines to determine if your teacher is qualified or not as laid out in various Lamrim. If the students that are with her find her method works for them, then good for them. I know that for myself and many many others who have been around her for any length of time, decide she is not the teacher she represents herself to be and thus not for them.

The Incarnation of Domo Geshe Rinpoche has already been recognised, But I wouldnt be suprised if both those recognised by HH Trijang Chocktrul ( Trijang and Domo rinpoche both had an incredible relationship through previous lives) and HH Dalai lama where of the same mind stream. Buddha gave us advise about harmful friends and this women who claims to be a projection of Domo Geshe isnt kosher...Green-light meditation ? where does that fit into the Gaden tradition, Firstly its wrong to proclaim oneself a Tulku without the offical recognition from high ranking Lamas within the tradition and secondly to use this self proclaimation as a basis for gathering students and so forth is just as crazy, Many people are guliable and taken in without knowing much of genuine Dharma.

As said Lamrim guidelines are a safe gaurd against people like this, However a quick background check can also yeild some results that would put people off investing any faith in someone who has this far failed to gain recognition Gelug masters.

Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.